radfemberry: unholy-lesbian: whatthefuuuuuuccckkkk: lesbian-lizards: sailorhoneybee: She’s speaking
radfemberry: unholy-lesbian: whatthefuuuuuuccckkkk: lesbian-lizards: sailorhoneybee: She’s speaking up for real, breathing lesbians and y’all are looking for imaginary ones? Making your priorities clearer and clearer everyday So because she wasn’t concerned with lesbian representation decades ago she can’t be an ally to lesbians now? I know gen z is used to every single y.a show or book having an abundance of gay but that was not common at all even 10 years ago, let alone 20 so not having gay characters in the first place is bad and adding a gay character/making an existing character gay later is also bad, got it The first Harry Potter book was written in 1997. Until 2000, there was a law in England which stated that one “shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality”.Her book was already the subject of controversy because of promoting “witchcraft” and her publishers were worried the book wouldn’t get off the ground because she was a women. It would be amazing if she had have written in gay characters, but it also likely would have killed the entire Harry Potter franchise.We not that far past the point where blatent and open homophobia was not only common but the norm. It still is the norm in many places. Think about that before you accuse J.K. Rowling of not including gay characters in her novel published more than 20 years ago. -- source link